]]>
4 TICKETS AVAILABLE FOR THE NEW YORK EVENT 09/2014tag:https:,2014:/www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread8979/viewthread/.176502014-07-05T17:58:42Z2014-07-05T19:06:03Zpezata
I HAVE 4 TICKETS FOR THE UPCOMING EVENT AT THE TIMES CENTER IN NEW YORK CITY ON 9/12/2014.
]]>
Sam Harris @ NYC, September 2014tag:https:,2014:/www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread8979/viewthread/.175022014-04-18T18:58:30Z1970-01-01T00:00:00Zeab4311
Anyone else attending Harris’s lecture in NYC 2014?
]]>
PLEASE VISIT INDIA!!tag:https:,2012:/www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread8979/viewthread/.170612012-11-23T17:46:23Z2012-11-24T05:45:17Zfanofscience
Hello Sam Harris,

Do you have any visit to India in near future? If not, can you kindly come to India? Also, could you give suggestions for Indians across the world?

And cheers for Sam Harris!

/Edited: moved notes to relevant forum of Politics-Regional/

]]>
Any Sam Harris events upcoming??tag:https:,2012:/www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread8979/viewthread/.169752012-09-23T15:09:54Z1970-01-01T00:00:00Zloiscatherine1
Is Sam speaking at any events in upcoming in 2012??
]]>
God in the Box film premiering at the Heartland Film Festival in Indianapolis, Indianatag:https:,2011:/www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread8979/viewthread/.163222011-10-05T16:55:57Z2011-10-05T16:56:40ZDave31
God in the Box film premiering at the Heartland Film Festival in Indianapolis, Indiana playing October 17 through 22.

]]>
Craig?tag:https:,2011:/www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread8979/viewthread/.156632011-03-10T21:24:42Z1970-01-01T00:00:00ZReerr
I’m looking forward to Sam’s debate with WLC, but at the same time I’m slightly apprehensive. In the spirit of this thought, I was wondering if anyone else had thoughts on WLC’s five arguments?

I foresee Dr. Craig borrowing heavily from Blackford’s review of Harris’ book, and quote-mining liberally to undermine Sam’s rather fringe ideas about morality. Given the problematic foundation of his thesis, most notably the lack of any serious research on the science of morality, do any of you feel this could be a sticky situation for Sam until such research manifests?

I have also looked at the Kalam Cosmological Argument:

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause

2. The universe began to exist

3. Therefore, the universe has a cause

and it seems to me to commit the fallacy of equivocation in premises one and two. Isn’t he confusing physical causation with the formulation of existing matter into a new identity? Is there actually any evidence that physical matter ‘begins to exist’ on a regular basis, and would then be considered caused? An H2O molecule may ‘begin to exist’ in the sense that the new form of existing matter has attained a new identity, but can it actually be said to have ‘begun to exist’ in the sense he is claiming the universe ‘began to exist’? or are they, as it seems to me, two very different types of beginning, thus committing the above named fallacy?

I’ve also found premise two, in and of itself, problematic in the use of the word ‘begin’. Since time supposedly started with the big bang, does it even make sense to say the universe ‘began to exist’? Couldn’t it be said that, since at no time was the universe NOT in existence, it is then eternal (timeless definition)? Wouldn’t there need to be a moment prior to the existence of the universe, logically entailing the presence of time, to enable the use of the word ‘begin’ and ‘cause’?

I’ve heard his response to this objection in a debate against the Atty. Eddie Tabbash, where he claims cause and effect can be simultaneous with the analogy of a bowling ball and cushion. While Tabbash’s reply to this was rather weak, It seems that Craig’s response nullifies his argument for a ‘personal’ cause, which he justifies with the chain of causality, and would then leave him with nothing but his subjective ‘this is not an argument’ argument from personal experience with which to bridge the deism-theism gap. Perhaps forcing him to grapple with the inherent contradictions between his arguments could be the key to crumbling his house of cards.

Finally, his response to the POE. He claims that the argument presupposes the theist’s position, but it then ignores the important theological nuances of the salvation defense. Once here, most of his opponent’s allow the muddy water to stagnate until closing remarks, where Craig reasserts the salvation defense as somehow solid by virtue of it being ignored. Personally, I think this is a mistake of his opponents. If they were to quickly reach this supposed stalemate and press for an actual argument, not just speculation, that would connect the dots between tsunami, starvation, and salvation (as most dead children are unable to convert to christianity, according to a poll I just made up), I think Craig would be left flopping about on dry land like a fish out of water.

I also think Craig pushes hard on most of his opponents for arguments AGAINST the existence of God, and I think most of them ignore a very strong point: arguments like the POE, failures of cognition to explain revelation, and inconsistencies in the supposed ‘changeless’ nature of God are themselves arguments against the existence of such a being. If god is supposed to be all-loving, and all powerful, wouldn’t the existence of evil be, in and of itself, an argument against the existence of a being with these attributes? It seems like the salvation defense is a total non-sequitor unless the main focus of this being is the afterlife, which then calls this entire vale of tears into question as arbitrary and unnecessarily crude (Hitchens handles this beautifully in his debate with Craig, and in his book The Portable Atheist).

—

TL;DR: I think craig’s arguments are beatable, but I *think* the key is to out-organize him. Craig’s one weakness is his numerous speaking engagements; the internet is an unrestrained glimpse at his playbook, and I hope Sam puts organization above eloquence.

]]>
Sam Harris at TED 2010tag:https:,2009:/www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread8979/viewthread/.139592009-12-23T10:17:41Z1970-01-01T00:00:00Zmattyohe
The speaker list is up, and Sam is going to speak in the section titled (of course) Reason.

]]>
You don’t wanna miss THIS one!tag:https:,2009:/www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread8979/viewthread/.132052009-08-26T15:49:42Z2009-08-26T15:50:13ZSkepticXThis movie looks like it’s made of pure, concentrated AWESOME!
]]>
Christian Kistch Contesttag:https:,2009:/www.samharris.org/forum/viewthread8979/viewthread/.120202009-04-10T17:23:05Z1970-01-01T00:00:00ZNotMyGod
Hi Infidels,
I’m a big Harris fan and have an atheist blog, Not My God, for a book project I’m doing about the personal experiences of atheists in America.
Just for fun, the blog God is Pretend and I are running a Christian Kitsch contest. Please visit my site
Not My Godhttp://www.sarahtrachtenberg.com